Friday, February 10, 2012

STORYLINE Police / Public Safety

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

No high resolution image exists...

Loading images

The Sacramento Press is publishing a series of documents and e-mails about the city’s planned surveillance system. In May and June e-mails, city officials and staffers were preparing to defend the city’s planned surveillance system against criticism from the local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

The city plans to buy a $615,000 surveillance system with 32 security cameras, four mobile surveillance trailers and other related equipment. Sacramento officials announced in April that the city had been chosen to receive Federal Homeland Security grant funds to pay for the surveillance package. However, the city is still waiting for the California Emergency Management Agency to provide the federal funds.

The Sacramento Police Department and the Sacramento County chapter of the ACLU have sparred over the cameras: The ACLU argues that they do not counter crime, while police department spokesman Norm Leong contends that they are a helpful tool.

Police department managers and staffers at the offices of Mayor Kevin Johnson and City Councilman Rob Fong discussed the ACLU’s criticism of the cameras in May 19 and June 1 e-mail messages.

Documents that provide details on the planned surveillance system are available here.

Read about the formal procedures that Sacramento police personnel will follow when working with surveillance cameras.

The California Public Records Act request submitted by the Sacramento County chapter of the ACLU to City Manager Ray Kerridge can be read here.

Kathleen Haley is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.

Rate

Community

9 Votes up

0 Votes down

Flag

Your Tags

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.

Cinamon Vann

August 5, 2009 | 9:00 AM

I'm really glad the SacPress is covering this issue. Keep up the great work, Kathleen!

1 0

Ali Tabatabai

edited on August 5, 2009 | 5:03 PM

Interesting. I'm looking forward to seeing these emails, and seeing what a public records request here in Sacramento actually turns up. Great work.

I covered a similar story in 2007 when SF proposed to add additional cameras to some of its neighborhoods. There was quite a mixed reaction in the community, as expected. Some people thought they were a good deterrent, others said it just "washed" crime down the street. In fact, I remeber sometime after, The Chronicle published a story about the cameras' poor image quality. In one instance, the police failed to identify a suspect actually caught commiting a crime in the camera's field of view. It would be interesting to see some of the ancecdotes since then.

1 0

Kathleen Haley

August 5, 2009 | 5:59 PM

Hi Cinamon and Ali,
Thanks for your feedback. I really appreciate it!
Cheers,
Kathleen

0 0

memary10

edited on August 6, 2009 | 2:03 PM

It seems pretty insane that the city is planning on spending $615,000 on security cameras of extremely dubious value (according to all the studies) in a time of such extreme budget constraints. Although federal funds come with constraints it is my understanding that the city is not locked into the camera scheme and could use the funds for other security and policing issues. How about some neighborhood foot patrols again, especially in mid-town where it is vitally important to our local economy that people feel safe walking around at night?

0 0